Appendix D

APEC Project Quality Assessment Framework (QAF)
Forum Assessment of Project Quality at Application

Notes:

  • This quality assessment form (QAF) is to be used prior to submission as a way of improving the proposal. Assessors are requested to provide comments against each question. These can praise, suggest changes, or highlight areas of concern. Through constructive comments from stakeholders and members, improvements to the proposals can be made prior to the formal quality assessment undertaken by the Secretariat.
  • Assessors should not be from the proposing economy. Co-sponsoring economies may undertake the QAF.
  • The QAF must be submitted along with the project proposal. Project Overseer should incorporate all QAF comments into a single consolidated document before submission.
  • Please refer any questions you have to your Program Director.

Proposal name:

Assessor’s details: (Name; Department Ministry/ Agency Institution; Economy)

Question / Comments
Is all project identification data provided?
Relevance: assessing the connection to APEC’s policy agenda, priority themes and goals
Please tick: Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory
Can links to APEC priorities and key APEC themes be identified more clearly?
How can the objectives be more clear, achievable or measurable?
Has APEC’s value-add been clearly articulated, particularly why it is an important project for APEC to be carrying out?
Impact: assessing expected results for APEC and stakeholders
Please tick: Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory
Has the proposal shown how the planned outputs (goods and services) will contribute to the desired change? Could there be ways to improve their quality utility?
Can the intended changes from this project, particularly the difference it will make to direct beneficiaries, be more clearly expressed?
Will this have the active participation of a large number of APEC members? How could more members be engaged?
Are there other beneficiaries and stakeholders that could benefit from this project that should be engaged in its development?
Could there be better ways to communicate and promote the project’s outputs and results, particularly to external parties? Are there other quality assurance measures that should be taken over the products prior to distribution?
How could the proposal better ensure that both women and men are appropriately involved in the planning and implementation of this project?
Should any further project risks be identified? How could they be managed?
Effectiveness: assessing how well the project can achieve its objectives
Please tick: Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory
Can the definition of the problem (causes and constraints), and explanation of the options that are available to address it, be improved?
Based on the problem articulated, is this a sound way to address the problem? Could alternative approaches be considered?
Can arrangements for assessing the project’s results be improved?
Has this project integrated lessons learned from previous projects?
Can the project do more to get commitment for the project’s success from external APEC stakeholders?
Sustainability: assessing if benefits and lessons learned are likely to continue after the project
Please tick:  Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory
Are the project’s long term intended impacts explained well, particularly in connection to the fora’s objectives and future work plan?
Could additional mechanisms be put in place to support the changes brought about by the project?
Are there any further suggestions about how the lessons learned from this project can be disseminated within APEC, particularly in relation to whether the project can be replicated or expanded in the future?
Efficiency: assessing the design process and implementation management
Please tick: Satisfactory  Unsatisfactory
Is the budget reasonable for the project’s objectives and outputs? Is there evidence of value for money?
Overall comment on proposal quality:
Overall quality assessment: Please tick: Satisfactory Unsatisfactory